Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort

Expand Messages
  • Harvey Schneider
    ... From: jodyrrr To: Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM Subject: [Meditation Society
    Message 1 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@...>
      To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM
      Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort


      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey Schneider"
      > <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...>
      > > To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 12:20 AM
      > > Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
      > >
      > >
      > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey Schneider"
      > > > <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > [snip]
      > > >
      > > > > Hi Jody,
      [snip]
      > > > > What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
      > > > > lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
      > > > > Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
      > > > > of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
      > > > > find comfort to be the universal motivator.
      > > >
      > > > Of course. But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
      > > > the world isn't blue.

      The reason the world cannot be all blue is because
      in the absence of any other color the word blue
      cannot be defined. Its contrast with other colors
      is what gives it meaning.
      You cannot have a true statement with a critical word
      undefined.
      When you use "comfort seeking" to apply to everything,
      there is nothing to contrast "comfort seeking" with and
      define it so that it can be picked out from what is not
      comfort seeking.
      The sense it seems to make is similar to the apparent
      sense of some nonsense verse.
      Nice poetry, empty metaphysics.
      Harvey
    • Bruce Morgen
      ... From: jodyrrr To: Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM Subject: [Meditation Society
      Message 2 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
        Harvey Schneider wrote:
        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@...>
        To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM
        Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
        
        
          
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
        <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
            
        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...>
        To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 12:20 AM
        Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
        
        
              
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
        <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
        
        [snip]
        
                
        Hi Jody,
                  
        [snip]
          
        What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
        lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
        Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
        of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
        find comfort to be the universal motivator.
                  
        Of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
        the world isn't blue.
                
        The reason the world cannot be all blue is because
        in the absence of any other color the word blue
        cannot be defined.  Its contrast with other colors
        is what gives it meaning.
        You cannot have a true statement with a critical word
        undefined.
        When you use "comfort seeking" to apply to everything,
        there is nothing to contrast "comfort seeking" with and
        define it so that it can be picked out from what is not
        comfort seeking.
        The sense it seems to make is similar to the apparent
        sense of some nonsense verse.
        Nice poetry, empty metaphysics.
        Harvey
        
          
        Well then, just about all
        "metaphysics" qualify as
        "bad," eh?
      • Harvey Schneider
        ... From: Bruce Morgen To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re:
        Message 3 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 1:44 PM
          Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort

          Harvey Schneider wrote:
          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@...>
          To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM
          Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
          
          
            
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
          <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
              
          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...>
          To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 12:20 AM
          Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
          
          
                
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
          <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
          
          [snip]
          
                  
          Hi Jody,
                    
          [snip]
            
          What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
          lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
          Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
          of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
          find comfort to be the universal motivator.
                    
          Of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
          the world isn't blue.
                  
          The reason the world cannot be all blue is because
          in the absence of any other color the word blue
          cannot be defined.  Its contrast with other colors
          is what gives it meaning.
          You cannot have a true statement with a critical word
          undefined.
          When you use "comfort seeking" to apply to everything,
          there is nothing to contrast "comfort seeking" with and
          define it so that it can be picked out from what is not
          comfort seeking.
          The sense it seems to make is similar to the apparent
          sense of some nonsense verse.
          Nice poetry, empty metaphysics.
          Harvey
          
            
          Well then, just about all
          "metaphysics" qualify as
          "bad," eh?
          Hi Bruce,
           
          Without going into detailed case studies
          of metaphysical systems needed to do
          full justice to your question, I can say
          that metaphysical theory which rely on
          undefined and or undefinable essential
          terms need repair work to be intelligible.
           
          If you care to bring up specific examples
          of metaphyical systems, it could be
          instructive to examine them for
          intelligibility.
           
          Harvey
        • Bruce Morgen
          ... Original Message ----- From: Bruce Morgen To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [Meditation
          Message 4 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
            Harvey Schneider wrote:
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 1:44 PM
            Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort

            Harvey Schneider wrote:
            ----- Original Message ----- 
            From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@...>
            To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 10:04 AM
            Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
            
            
              
            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
            <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
                
            ----- Original Message ----- 
            From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...>
            To: <meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 12:20 AM
            Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: The cash value of comfort
            
            
                  
            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Harvey  Schneider"
            <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
            
            [snip]
            
                    
            Hi Jody,
                      
            [snip]
              
            What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
            lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
            Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
            of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
            find comfort to be the universal motivator.
                      
            Of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
            the world isn't blue.
                    
            The reason the world cannot be all blue is because
            in the absence of any other color the word blue
            cannot be defined.  Its contrast with other colors
            is what gives it meaning.
            You cannot have a true statement with a critical word
            undefined.
            When you use "comfort seeking" to apply to everything,
            there is nothing to contrast "comfort seeking" with and
            define it so that it can be picked out from what is not
            comfort seeking.
            The sense it seems to make is similar to the apparent
            sense of some nonsense verse.
            Nice poetry, empty metaphysics.
            Harvey
            
              
            Well then, just about all
            "metaphysics" qualify as
            "bad," eh?
            Hi Bruce,
             
            Without going into detailed case studies
            of metaphysical systems needed to do
            full justice to your question, I can say
            that metaphysical theory which rely on
            undefined and or undefinable essential
            terms need repair work to be intelligible.
             
            If you care to bring up specific examples
            of metaphyical systems, it could be
            instructive to examine them for
            intelligibility.
             
            You appear to be implying that
            Jodyji's simple puport isn't
            intelligible -- is that correct? 
            I personally have no particular
            interest in "metaphysical
            systems" (imo the term is quite
            oxymoronic -- since anything
            outside the realm of physics is
            not objectively measurable, any
            such "system" would have to be
            subjective in basis and
            therefore systematic only in
            reference to itself).
          • Gene Poole
            ... Years ago, I observed something similar to what Jody proposes. Rather than mere homeostasis , living things (to include all life forms, including cells)
            Message 5 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
              > "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
              > > "Harvey Schneider" > <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
              > > From: "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...>
              > > Subject: Re: The cash value of comfort
              > > > > "Harvey Schneider" > > > <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > [snip]
              > > >
              > > > > Hi Jody,
              > > > > What you say you are doing is science. Observation
              > > > > leading to hypothesis, followed by testing.
              > > >
              > > > Well, yeah. But there is no data. There is an
              > > > intellectual overlay on top of raw manifestation
              > > > by way of this mind.
              > > >
              > > > > What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
              > > > > lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
              > > > > Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
              > > > > of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
              > > > > find comfort to be the universal motivator.
              > > >
              > > > Of course. But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
              > > > the world isn't blue.
              > > >
              > > > > Questioning the stake or the comfort motive may
              > > > > be useful as an exploratory tool.
              > > > > The mistake is to go metaphysical with it and declare
              > > > > it - or even raise the possiblity that it is - an invariable
              > > > > law which you have discovered in nature.
              > > > > Harvey
              > > >
              > > > I'll consider that. You may be completely correct.
              > > >
              > > > But why couldn't comfort be like gravity for the
              > > > soul, that all beings seek security as a result of this
              > > > 'gravity'.
              > > >
              > > > Look at life at the cellular level. It's all about input
              > > > and output and optimizing based on conditions. Really,
              > > > seeking chemical comfort. It makes perfect sense to me
              > > > that this cellular seeking of comfort has been extrapolated
              > > > into the universe of complex organisms, which are comprised
              > > > of billions of cells.
              > > >
              > > > The applicability of the idea may be in question, but
              > > > this blue world hasn't yet revealed to me that it isn't
              > > > actually blue.
              > > >
              > > > --jody.
              > >
              > > Hi Jodyji,
              > >
              > > Gravity is science because we can imagine observations
              > > and experiments which would disprove it.
              > > .
              > > Your story of chemical comfort seeking cells must sound
              > > gratuitously anthropomorphic even to you.
              >
              > It's an anthropomorphized view of what goes on there, but
              > that doesn't mean it doesn't describe.
              >
              > Think about it. Cells are chemical factories. They need
              > certain precursor molecules which they must acquire or
              > have delivered to them. They need their products and
              > their waste to be taken away. A cell's comfort would be
              > the optimization of these conditions. Conditions that
              > are less than optimal must be accomodated as best as
              > possible, seeking the best configuation for that set of
              > conditions.
              >
              > > I imagine you might say that charged particles which attract
              > > and repel each other depending on the combination of their
              > > positive and negative charges do so for reasons of comfort?
              >
              > Not in a 'human sitting in his easy chair way', but certainly
              > as a 'this is the best state I can obtain under these conditions
              > way' minus the anthropomorphic verbalizations.
              >
              > > And that the planets follow their bliss in orbiting around the
              > > sun.
              >
              > What else can they do? They've found their places in
              > relationship to their environment, whose largest influence
              > is the gravity of the sun.
              >
              > > I can see the aesthetic appeal of the story line you are
              > > presenting. It might be a worthwhile competition for the
              > > mythology of the Greek gods. During the heyday of belief
              > > in these Gods, there was nothing which could disprove
              > > their existence and influence.
              > >
              > > It's a poetic way of talking and I apologize for trying to talk
              > > you out of it.
              > >
              > > Harvey
              >
              > Don't apologize Harvey. I really appreciate your comments.
              > You always make good points, and I always learn from the
              > interaction.
              >
              > Of course it's anthropomorphic to say that cells and planets
              > *seek* comfort. They find their state, whatever that is, in
              > response to environmental conditions. But functioning systems
              > have a tendency to optimize whenever possible. They don't
              > need to be alive to do this. So the planets all spin around
              > the sun, negative particles find positive ones to hook up with,
              > and cells pump out more product when provided with energy
              > and materials. These activities accept the overlay of the
              > comfort doctrine quite nicely in my view. I agree that it's
              > just one human's view (with an agenda to make it fit),
              > but that doesn't mean (to me) that it's not a good way of
              > contextualizing it all.
              >
              > I'm not trying to develop a mythology about it, just give
              > a reason why things keep going, and to try to show the
              > general direction they keep going in.
              >
              > --jody.

              Years ago, I observed something similar
              to what Jody proposes.

              Rather than 'mere homeostasis', living 'things'
              (to include all life forms, including cells) move
              toward _pleasure_. This prompted me to conceptualize
              what I call, the 'compass of pleasure'.

              'Mere homeostasis' is itself a high goal, given
              the many potentially fatal challenges presented
              to living organisms. But it seems that Life is 'not content'
              with mere contentment; and the seeking of pleasure,
              not just comfort, is the means to achieve 'optimization'
              of occupation of one's niche in the biosphere.

              An organism which attains 'pleasure', obtains that
              reward by means of exercising capability; and it is
              the exercise of capability, which results in that talent
              becoming strong and always available. In other words,
              success in attaining pleasure, rewards effort and
              strengthens existing capabilities.

              So I think Jody is correct in this issue; at root of
              his assertion, is an unstated assertion of homeostasis
              as a life-sustaining principle; and he points out, using
              the word 'comfort', that there is a certain 'bias' which
              serves to 'adjust' homeostasis to a fine degree of
              success. One could say, that such a bias will assure
              that homeostatic motion 'exceeds' the minimum,
              and thus, makes more 'room' or 'space' within the
              range of 'ideal' states.

              Moreover, it is my observation, that the 'pleasure/pain'
              axis, serves as a dynamic criteria for success of any
              biological organism; the ultimate result of avoidance
              of pain, and attainment of pleasure, results in less
              wear and tear, less upkeep, and therefore, is seen as
              a primary 'conservator' of energy. 'Optimization',
              which represents 'more than the minimum requirement'
              needed for survival, assures success in competitions
              between organisms which vie for occupation of a
              given niche in the biosphere.

              Recently recompiled researches, point out that we
              are looking at much more, than 'survival of the fittest';
              we are actually seeing, a deeper principle; 'the happiest
              are the fittest'. Contentment, comfort and pleasure are
              now being considered as primary components of survival,
              and those, represent 'effortless response to evolutionary
              stressors'. From a Darwinian POV, the conquest of pain,
              equals adaptation to potentially fatal challenge; survivors
              are thus embodied with a reward system, which is the
              sheer pleasure of being alive!


              ==Gene Poole==
            • jodyrrr
              ... wrote: [snip] ... You re the man Gene. It would appear that this idea s time has arrived. Grab a chair, sit back, and enjoy the show.
              Message 6 of 19 , Jan 4, 2004
                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                <gene_poole@q...> wrote:

                [snip]

                > Recently recompiled researches, point out that we
                > are looking at much more, than 'survival of the fittest';
                > we are actually seeing, a deeper principle; 'the happiest
                > are the fittest'. Contentment, comfort and pleasure are
                > now being considered as primary components of survival,
                > and those, represent 'effortless response to evolutionary
                > stressors'. From a Darwinian POV, the conquest of pain,
                > equals adaptation to potentially fatal challenge; survivors
                > are thus embodied with a reward system, which is the
                > sheer pleasure of being alive!
                >
                >
                > ==Gene Poole==

                You're the man Gene.

                It would appear that this idea's time has arrived.

                Grab a chair, sit back, and enjoy the show. Things are
                going to get mighty interesting as this poop hits the fan.

                --jody.
              • Harvey Schneider
                Note: a second attempt to make the conversational parts clear through selective boldfacing. Hi Jody, What is obvious is that if you look through a blue lens
                Message 7 of 19 , Jan 5, 2004
                  Note: a second attempt to make the conversational parts
                  clear through selective boldfacing.
                   
                  Hi Jody,
                            
                  What is obvious is that if you look through a blue
                  lens you'll find everything in the world is blue.
                  Likewise, if you take, interpret or define every kind
                  of motivation as a kind of comfort seeking, you will
                  find comfort to be the universal motivator.
                           
                  Of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't true, that
                  the world isn't blue.
                         
                   
                  The reason the world cannot be all blue is because
                  in the absence of any other color the word blue
                  cannot be defined.  Its contrast with other colors
                  is what gives it meaning.
                  You cannot have a true statement with a critical word
                  undefined.
                  When you use "comfort seeking" to apply to everything,
                  there is nothing to contrast "comfort seeking" with and
                  define it so that it can be picked out from what is not
                  comfort seeking.
                  The sense it seems to make is similar to the apparent
                  sense of some nonsense verse.
                  Nice poetry, empty metaphysics.
                  Harvey
                   
                   
                  Well then, just about all
                  "metaphysics" qualify as
                  "bad," eh?
                   
                   
                  Hi Bruce,
                   
                  Without going into detailed case studies
                  of metaphysical systems needed to do
                  full justice to your question, I can say
                  that metaphysical theory which rely on
                  undefined and or undefinable essential
                  terms need repair work to be intelligible.
                   
                  If you care to bring up specific examples
                  of metaphyical systems, it could be
                  instructive to examine them for
                  intelligibility.
                   
                  Harvey
                   
                   
                  You appear to be implying that
                  Jodyji's simple puport isn't
                  intelligible -- is that correct?
                   
                  Yes.  It sounds intelligible, because he is using
                  the word "comfort" which we all understand.  But
                  he is using "comfort" in an new way which he doesn't
                  define.  If he ever gets around to defining this new
                  sense of "comfort", showing what it includes and what
                  it excludes, then we can have another look.
                   
                  I personally have no particular
                  interest in "metaphysical
                  systems" (imo the term is quite
                  oxymoronic -- since anything
                  outside the realm of physics is
                  not objectively measurable, any
                  such "system" would have to be
                  subjective in basis and
                  therefore systematic only in
                  reference to itself).
                   
                  The Comfort Doctrine in its current formulation is
                  similar to the Phlogiston Doctrine which posited
                  a hypotheical substance released as flame in combustion.
                  Even though no one now believes that Phlogiston is
                  needed to explain combustion, its existence has never
                  been disproved.
                   
                  Like Phlogiston, the Comfort Factor, is not objectively
                  measurable.  Its right up there with hobgoblins and
                  gremlins.  If metaphysics is not the right word, perhaps
                  you can supply a more exact one.
                   
                   
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.